The "man on the street" of Iran, especially in the urban parts of the country, has always been fairly modern and pro-Western. Iran is also a very young country. Their baby boom makes the US baby boom look like nothing, and these young kids are just coming of age in a country that's repressive and lacks opportunity. That's not a formula that promotes conservative values. Couple that with their access to the Internet, the decades of quiet subversion that they've practiced- the nation is unstable as it is.

There are basically only two paths open to Iran- reform (which is the route things are taking right now), or a violent, bloody crackdown. There are some powerful people who would prefer the latter, and they have what essentially amounts to a private army that could make that happen. They realize, though, that lighting that match will create an uncontrolled situation, and they don't have enough power to make sure they come out on top.

generallyso:Did Subby mean to ask if Iran is finally recovering from having its modern, elected government overthrown by the US and replaced with a dictator? Unfortunately we're likely far away from that point.

So how long is it ok to hold a grudge?

Should people in the US still hold a grudge against Britain? Japan? Germany? The Vietnamese?

Arkanaut:21st Century? Whoa there. Let's see how they handle the 1960's first.

That's basically where they're at, demographically. Their mid/late-80s baby-boom is coming into adulthood and finding that they're dissatisfied with the conservative state of society, with their economic opportunities, with their nation's relationship with foreign countries. They aren't "in" the system yet, and hence really have very little to lose.

It's not a perfect match, obviously- the US never really had a theocratic paramilitary organization that can be used to crack down on dissent, nor has the US ever gotten into the habit of hiring mercenaries from neighboring countries for the same purpose. It is far from an idyllic future for Iran, but there's one thing that's certain: dramatic change is going to happen over the next decade.

jaybeezey:generallyso: Did Subby mean to ask if Iran is finally recovering from having its modern, elected government overthrown by the US and replaced with a dictator? Unfortunately we're likely far away from that point.

So how long is it ok to hold a grudge?

Should people in the US still hold a grudge against Britain? Japan? Germany? The Vietnamese?

I used to work around a Boomer (Vietnam Vet) who probably still hates them....(he's long retired, so at least I don't have to listen to his 'herp & derp any more....)

jaybeezey:generallyso: Did Subby mean to ask if Iran is finally recovering from having its modern, elected government overthrown by the US and replaced with a dictator? Unfortunately we're likely far away from that point.

So how long is it ok to hold a grudge?

Should people in the US still hold a grudge against Britain? Japan? Germany? The Vietnamese?

t3knomanser:The "man on the street" of Iran, especially in the urban parts of the country, has always been fairly modern and pro-Western. Iran is also a very young country. Their baby boom makes the US baby boom look like nothing, and these young kids are just coming of age in a country that's repressive and lacks opportunity. That's not a formula that promotes conservative values. Couple that with their access to the Internet, the decades of quiet subversion that they've practiced- the nation is unstable as it is.

There are basically only two paths open to Iran- reform (which is the route things are taking right now), or a violent, bloody crackdown. There are some powerful people who would prefer the latter, and they have what essentially amounts to a private army that could make that happen. They realize, though, that lighting that match will create an uncontrolled situation, and they don't have enough power to make sure they come out on top.

I remember seeing a Rick Steves special on the place; didn't seem anywhere near as backward as westerners think. Yeah, still not a high-falootin' good time over there, but it's no Somalia or North Korea.

generallyso:Did Subby mean to ask if Iran is finally recovering from having its modern, elected government overthrown by the US and replaced with a dictator? Unfortunately we're likely far away from that point.

To be fair, the US has pulled that move on a few nations (or tried to, in some cases), but most of them didn't hand over the reins to religious fundies afterwards.And as popular some of Mosaddegh's policies were with many people, he was by all accounts a secular and by the time the CIA overthrew him, he had already lost support with the Ayatollahs and their cohorts. He called for elections in late 1951, then suspended them afterwards because of "foreign agents" interference - or more likely realizing that most of the provincial votes would go to the clerics. Tehran is a nice power base to have, but it's not Iran...

Within the ME the Iranians on the whole are perhaps most western-friendly (or at least neutral) of the bunch, with the exception of Israel. But that's not saying all that much really.

neaorin:generallyso: Did Subby mean to ask if Iran is finally recovering from having its modern, elected government overthrown by the US and replaced with a dictator? Unfortunately we're likely far away from that point.

To be fair, the US has pulled that move on a few nations (or tried to, in some cases), but most of them didn't hand over the reins to religious fundies afterwards.And as popular some of Mosaddegh's policies were with many people, he was by all accounts a secular and by the time the CIA overthrew him, he had already lost support with the Ayatollahs and their cohorts. He called for elections in late 1951, then suspended them afterwards because of "foreign agents" interference - or more likely realizing that most of the provincial votes would go to the clerics. Tehran is a nice power base to have, but it's not Iran...

Within the ME the Iranians on the whole are perhaps most western-friendly (or at least neutral) of the bunch, with the exception of Israel. But that's not saying all that much really.

If they were smart, the Iranians would be cultivating a relationship with the US instead of going on about us being The Great Satan and such. The Arab nations to the west have never been friendly. The militants and theocrats to the east are hopelessly backward. To the north are the ever more aggressive Russians. Iran is pretty isolated.

Persnickety:If they were smart, the Iranians would be cultivating a relationship with the US instead of going on about us being The Great Satan and such.

Lets see, the United States supported a dictator in Iran. Then, when Saddam Hussein launched an invasion of Iran, using weapons of mass destruction, the United States supported him. Iranians watched as he used mustard gas, nerve agents, and other chemical weapons on border towns, affecting men, women, and children. Then, a president got up on the world stage and proclaimed Iran part of an "axis of evil" while launching military invasions into countries on both the eastern and western borders. They've been hit with crippling sanctions while trying to develop a nuclear power program that they see as their national right under the Non-Nuclear Proliferation Treaty. The United States made a complete mess out of the Iraq War, and then, in the ironic statement of the century, screamed about Iranian "foreign interference" in Iraq as if they have no interest on what happens on the other side of their border.

Iran isn't blameless in this, and they've done many, many things wrong. But it's not like the US has rolled out the welcome mat here.

I should probably also say there's barely a week that goes by where we don't hear discussion in the media about whether we should bomb Iran, and politicians have regularly called for military strikes on Iran.

Can you imagine what we would do if a country regularly ran articles in their paper saying "it's time to bomb the US before it's too late?"